• Rentlar
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    That’s because Russia took fuck all in 2023 when they were stuck at Avdiivka for months and months, way longer than expected by all sides. Once it fell, there were fewer natural choke points for Ukraine until Pokrovsk, and defense lines were not well prepared enough. So comparing taking a lot of fields to sending troops to capture a static point for a year is not really apples to apples imo.

    Kursk is and always was a gambit. My view is that losses and disorganization on the frontline from Ukrainian’s part on the Donetsk side, is independent from the results of the Kursk incursion, not because of it. As such, whether it was a overall good idea or not in hindsight, it appears that the primary objective of the incursion was met, as every troop, NK or Russian, stationed to recapture Kursk is one fewer re-inforcing the offensive in other areas.

    • Draghetta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I’m not sure that’s right.

      Nobody knows alternate timelines of course, but I wonder if NK troops would have been at all engaged were it not for Kursk - and NK engagement is very favourable for both sides of the agreement, and really bad news for the rest of us.

      Also I don’t know how many of the Russian Kursk troops are conscripts, but those would not have been in Donetsk anyway.

  • finderscult@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 hours ago

    But I was assured by the ncd guys that Russia would choke on Kursk and balkanize any day now that Biden let Ukraine strike inside Russia!